RE: Installing Postscript Fonts

RE: Installing Postscript Fonts

[Haseloff, Lutz]

Hi Hans, Hi Taco, Hi all

with the newest context the germandbls comes out as i without dot.
context 3101200 works ok.

Lutz

Re: Installing Postscript Fonts

[Uwe Koloska]

You wrote on Mon, 14 Feb 2000:
>Concerning fonts (2 questions): 
>
>I suppose taco knows more about this. Are you sure the ss is in
>the font?

Yes -- the fontcommand {\ss} (or {\SS} see below) is working

>Are you also sure that the font is in ec encoding?

Yes, I have used this same font with LaTeX.  Actually I copied the settings
from LaTeXs Font Description files (T1bgs.fd) -- only changing the syntax (of
course ;-))

>If
>the glyphs are there and the encoding matches, things should go
>ok. 

After some long searching there arouse two questions:

  - how can I specify the input encoding (\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc} in
    LaTeX)?  I just found something that looks like this for five
    inputencodings (ibm, latin2, unicode, viscii, windows) -- my thought from
    looking at these files (\defineactivecharacter ß {\ss}) proved wrong ...

  - how can I specify a specific output encoding (\usepackage[T1]{fontenc} in
    LaTeX)?  And due to my experiments, the order of definefontsynomym with
    the optional [encoding=...] (that seems to me the only place to define the
    output encoding) and the setupbodyfont is important

Just to make it clear: The output encoding works just fine {\ss} gives the
'germandbls'.  And the native 'adieresis' ('ä') and all the other umlauts come
out fine -- only 'germandbls' ('ß') gives nothing (no space, no wrong glyph --
simply nothing).

Oh, and by thinking about this stuff:

  - what file synonyms are taking effect by resolving names like
    [Courier-BoldOblique]?   The ones from font-ber.tex or font-fil.tex?  Or
    are they all searched in a specific order?

I have made the simplest input file to show the error (mine or contexts?):

--- snip -----------------------------------------------------------------
%\setupbodyfont[pos,sans]                                          %% (1)

\definefontsynonym [Sans]         [Helvetica2]                     %% (2)
\definefontsynonym [Helvetica2]   [Helvetica] [encoding=ec]        %% (3)
%\definefontsynonym [Helvetica2]  [phvr8t]  [encoding=ec]          %% (4)

\definebodyfont [14.4pt,12pt,11pt,10pt,9pt,8pt,7pt,6pt,5pt] [ss] [default]

\setupbodyfont[sans]

\starttext

Jetzt kommt ein bi{\SS}chen Text, der hoffentlich viel interessanter als
der übliche Blindtext zu lesen ist. Aber auch aus Blindtext kann man
viel lernen, wie Willberg und Forsmann nicht müde werden zu betonen.
Und noch ein bißchen Text.

\stoptext
--- snip -----------------------------------------------------------------

With (0) included and (2)--(4) excluded all works as expected -- oh, not all,
because to have a 'germandbls' one has to type {\SS} and not {\ss} as suggested
by "enco-ec.tex".

Without (0) and (4) and with (2) and (3) the umlauts and the 'ß' came out as
in the first example.

Without (0) and (3) and with (2) and (4) umlauts are correct and {\SS} became
'ß' but 'ß' became 'SS' ...

Did I forget some steps defining the correct font???

A last surprise:
  - With (2) and (3) and without (1), (4) and the line starting with
"\definebodyfont" there are no umlauts and only the {\SS} appears as 'ß' ...

Wow, what a complicated story.
Yours
Uwe Koloska

-- 
mailto:koloska@rcs.urz.tu-dresden.de
http://rcswww.urz.tu-dresden.de/~koloska/
--                                    --
right now the web page is in german only
but this will change as time goes by ;-)